With regard to the scope and meaning of the question, the Court ruled that the reference to the “Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo” in the question put by the General Assembly did not prevent it from deciding for itself whether the declaration of independence had been promulgated by that body or another entity. It concluded that, in light of its jurisprudence, there were “no compelling reasons for it to decline to exercise its jurisdiction” in respect of the request. Having established that it did have jurisdiction to render the advisory opinion requested, the Court examined the question, raised by a number of participants, as to whether it should nevertheless decline to exercise that jurisdiction as a matter of discretion. Before reaching this conclusion, the Court first addressed the question of whether it possessed jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested by the General Assembly. In its Advisory Opinion delivered on 22 July 2010, the Court concluded that “the declaration of independence of Kosovo adopted on 17 February 2008 did not violate international law”. Twenty-eight States and the authors of the unilateral declaration of independence participated in the oral proceedings, which took place from 1 to 11 December 2009.
Fourteen States submitted written comments on the written statements of States and on the written contribution of the authors of the declaration of independence. Thirty-six Member States of the United Nations filed written statements and the authors of the unilateral declaration of independence filed a written contribution. On 8 October 2008 (resolution 63/3), the General Assembly decided to ask the Court to render an advisory opinion on the following question : “Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law ?”
0 kommentar(er)
